Sorry your browser is not supported!

1.
====
When I read Lee's description of Patch 4 a while back which mentioned how the whole system had been disjointed and was now being streamlined my first response was "What!!! - You mean DBS haven't got this setup already ?!"

I must ask if the rest of the DBP internals are like this.

The system DB has of separating everything makes for less flexibility. For example, there has to be a ghost command for the Matrixes , the objects and so on. This also means that a lot of DBPs new features such as reflection shading are not available on matrixes and so on.

Could DBS consider restructuring the system so that such features can be applied to all of the 3D "elements".

2
====

What Rich,Lee,Mike and the rest of DBS seem to be completely ignorant of is that the way to win Blitzers and other language users back does not necessarily lie in 3D features. Despite Blitz3D's age - it is technically virtually as good as DarkBASIC. The most requested updates in their forums are language enhancements.

--> Functions in types

These would make programming considerably easier to organise in more complicated programs

--> Arrays in types

These really have to be added soon, the lack of arrays in types means that UDTs are a lot less useful than they could be - they cannot be used for advanced purposes.

--> Support for binary / hex types

--> Better Pointer support

--> Type inheritance

These features would only be used if people wanted to use them, I am not in favour of a system where they have to be used.

It seems to me that DBS is really gearing their software to absolute amateurs. Sure, "SET SHADOW SHADING ON 1" is great - but I REALLY want more flexible commands, using optional parameters this wouldn't exactly be hard to implement as I am sure DBP does it internally anyway. Writing any game requires a good knowledge of 3D maths and so on - so DBS might as well add the commands for advanced users. They did the right thing with MEMBLOCKS (although they had the nerve to charge for it with DBC-E) and the plugin / DLL support is excellent.

More flexibility!
More powerful language!
More generic layout!

I know this has all been said before but I would really welcome and official view on this from Lee, Rich, Mike or GuyS.

--> Ability for DBP to compile "code libraries" - so people can release closed source, pre-compiled DBP code libraries (current plugins have to be written in C++ / Pascal)

Dark Shader;

I totally agree, coming from the professional programming
field, this would all make sense, and I'm sure the DB team
has this on the table (it may be buried), but never the less
it's thought of, there, or just getting planned.

More flexibliity! For DBPro to evolve, this has to be a step.

More Powerful! This of course will come with time, as commands, advanced data types are added, so will the
language to control them.

Ability to compile "code libraries", this my friend would
be a good thing, think of the possible ideas this could
generate.


All in all, DBPro has/or is going down this path, it's just
the matter of deciding which path to take, more long term
goals need to be set (which they are, I'm sure), but at the
same time you can't please all the people all the time, and
still keep it EASY to use, EASY+POWERFUL+FLEXIBLE+SOLID = DBPro II


Me for one, is , but would enjoy stability most of all.
Make DBPro SOLID, and it will stand above the rest!!


Thanks

All of this and more is coming - some of it sooner than you think - code libraries will appear with patch 4.

The recode in patch4 is happening to both speed up whats there, to integrate all of the 3D elements, to make it easier to debug and fix (all the code in one place), and therefore to make it more stable.

What we have here is an evolving language, but it can only evolve so fast.

Lee types at close to the speed of light as it is

Extremely late for me these days and thought I would check out the forums before I went to bed. Felt a personal reply would help this thread more than most.

I totally agree there are basic programming structures that are still required to complete the compiler. I do want to push the use of pointers and more dynamic types and increased usage in all areas of the language. As another post indicated our first focus is stability. For us, this is a very important goal for us, alas at the cost of other areas. We are s small team, and we will get there soon. Another bit area is further optimisation of the compiler to the executables you produce get faster naturally. Functions in types is quite common now but hard for me to fit into my mindset of what a BASIC should be. There may be a simple and intuitive way of presenting this type of functionality (pardon the puns), and when lightning strikes it will go in. As a smug note, binary, octal and hexidemical notations are supported

Dear Mr. Bamber;

Thanks for taking an important minute of your time to
respond, very much appreciation goes out to you and
all of your hard working team.

"May DBPro, enlighten programmers world wide!"


Warm regards,
Lawrence

Mr. Bamber, I have only one question for you. Why are listed as an user and not an administrator?

ya i noticed the Binary, Oct and Hex support... dang manual had its implimentation tucked away in a very small dark corner

right now the team is just really you and mike isn't it lee? so can understand why development is kinda slow on this front. Especially as the main business right now is debugging rather than enhancing abilities.

from what i understand its not so much a case of you don't want to add functions and arrays to types, its more a case that you can't see a Basic form of achieving them right?
If thats the case there are a good few users who are quite well versed in C++ and the language setups that i reckon would be willing to give input on such things...

well sleep well mate (^_^) cause were all very demanding here hehee and you need that rest to cope

Ummm yeah sure Lee should b a moderator lol otherwise it cld have been any1. But if we HAVE been graced by the presence of Mr Bamber in person, I bow in Awe. I've been using his stuff for um - well at least 5 years, I'm sure its more like 10 - I can't remember exact dates and credits... anyway man - HI